The Supreme Court case Carondelet vs. Saint Louis was a dispute over the ownership of certain land in Missouri. The city of St. Louis had granted a tract of land to one John B. Cerré, who later sold it to Thomas F. Riddick and his wife Mary Ann Riddick for $2,000 in 1845; however, when they attempted to take possession of the property they were denied by the City Council on grounds that it had been previously deeded away from them without their knowledge or consent and given instead to another party named Charles Gratiot Jr., who then transferred title back to the City Council itself in 1851 as part payment for taxes owed by him at that time. The Riddicks sued both Gratiot and St Louis claiming damages due to this illegal transfer which deprived them of their rightful ownership rights; ultimately, after several appeals through lower courts, the US Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of Carondelet (the name used by St Louis at that time) finding no evidence presented proving any wrongdoing on its part with regard to this transaction - thus affirming its right as owner over said lands despite prior claims made against it by other parties involved

In Carondelet vs. Saint Louis, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a city had the power to tax property owned by another municipality. The majority opinion held that cities do not have this authority and that it is reserved for state governments alone. However, Justice Grier dissented from this decision on two grounds: firstly, he argued that states should be able to delegate their taxing powers as they see fit; secondly, he maintained that allowing municipalities to tax each other would create an efficient system of taxation which could benefit both parties involved in such transactions. He concluded his dissent by noting that if Congress were allowed to pass laws granting cities the right of taxation over one another’s properties then there would be no need for judicial intervention in such matters.